Secondly, I have asked how one is to correct the station data of which, 69% are near heat sources in violation of the siting guidelines, when no one keeps records of when the AC is on. No one takes measurements at each station of how much heat arrives at the thermometer from the heat source, and that is another important piece of information to know when one is correcting the station record. You haven't answered or even addressed this.

Now, given that one can prove that the US temperatures are artificially warmed merely by 'editing' and correction processes, one simply MUST raise the question if the same thing is being done in Russia for the Siberian data. After all, I pointed out that Siberian cities across 100 deg + of longitude don't show an increase in the degree-days above zero, which should be a parameter very very senstivie to warming. Please explain the discrepancy.

Finally, does it not bother you that the CRU now claims that they can't give anyone the raw data upon which all their conclusions are based? Science is founded on the principle of openness where critics get to criticize and repeat the experiment. In climatology we must simply trust and obey.

There are a lot of other issues you are ignoring but this should start it off. Please explain these issues.

Now to engage your data (so you can see what one must do) I will now look at your tropospheric trend. Your tropospheric trend is once again a homogenized data source. Given that we know that the CRU and parts of the US climatological system were engaged in massive manipulation of the data, I prefer my data raw. Trust and obey Rich, that is what the climatologists are asking us to do. Trust their work and obey their politics. Trust is earned, once lost science loses.

To see how RATPAC and the surface trends line up see this annual comparison from last year. Note: I'll update this post when all the 2009 data comes out in the next few days. It's only the graphics that aren't available the trends above are from 2009.

This picture shows a step function in the satellite temperature and if you calculate the trend both before and after that step function jump, the upward trends are far far below your claim. Please explain the step change and why the trend is so low before and after it.